The Olmert Metamorphosis From Churchill To Chamberlain

 

Israel refuses to leave southern Lebanon until Lebanese forces and international forces can secure the border area. Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah promised to fight as long as Israel remained in southern Lebanon. UN's Kofi Annan has confirmed the Lebanese PM Siniora to be the gofer running between Nasrallah for instructions and back to the French and Arab League patrons for approval. It's going to be a long hot summer...

Only history will tell, a decade from now, but the writing may already be on the wall.

At this moment in time it is evident that Israel's signature on the UNSC Resolution 1701 is celebrated as a clear victory by the UN appeasers and anti-Semite member states, diligently paving the way for Thug-In-Chief to fulfill his promise to wipe Israel off the face of the world.

We have also been told that "the US decision to seek a cease-fire was the result of Israel's amateurish bungling of the first three weeks of the war. The Bush administration, they argued, was being blamed for the Olmert government's incompetence and so preferred to cut its losses and sue for a cease-fire. There is no doubt much truth to this assertion.

The Israeli government's prosecution of this war has been unforgivably inept. At the same time it should be noted that the short-term political gain accrued by the US by forging the cease-fire agreement will come back to haunt the US, Israel and all forces fighting the forces of global jihad in the coming weeks and months.

By handing a victory to Hezbollah, the resolution strengthens the belief of millions of supporters of jihad throughout the world that their side is winning and that they should redouble efforts to achieve their objectives of destroying Israel and running the US out of the Middle East."

What is not entirely clear is why Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert chose to fashion himself after Chamberlain instead of Churchill only days into the conflict?

What the hell happened to the unconditional release of the kidnapped soldiers. We have in effect legalized Hezbollah's illegal aggression, and given it the same consideration as the legitimate defense of the sovereign state of Israel, whilst at the same time making it impossible for her to defend herself against further aggressions without attracting the wrath of the International community.

This is not what Israel had in mind; instead the nation was hoping for a strong leader and for this kind of speech (read the whole thing, it's powerful):

In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to lead normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late.

Today, Binyamin Netanyahu is certainly getting ready to capitalize on the current mood of frustration and dispair over Israel's failed military mission only moments after Olmert took full responsibility for having tied both hands behind IDF's back during the past 4 weeks.

But again, instead of commenting on the past and what may or may not have been achieved, Olmert needs to focus the attention of everyone in Israel and everyone else in the world to ensure "that the international community understands that Israel will not repeat the mistake of standing by as Hizbullah rebuilds an arsenal of missiles and other sophisticated weaponry that can threaten us.

If the Syrian-Lebanese border is too porous to seal, then either Israel has to do its best to fill the gap by force, or the UN Security Council has to enforce its resolution with sanctions against Syria and, if Teheran is also involved, Iran.

In general, now is the time for Israel to make clear, through both words and actions, that it has no intention of standing by as Resolution 1701, like Resolution 1559 before it, becomes a dead letter - or worse, applies only to Israel and not to Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.

It is exactly such a process that led to the current war, and that will lead to war again if it is allowed to happen again.

Resolution 1701 reflects an international consensus that for Lebanon's and for Israel's sake, Syria and Iran must not be allowed to rebuild Hizbullah's state-within-a-state. The US and other countries behind the resolution know that if Syria pays no price for blatantly violating the resolution, then the chances that the resolution can be enforced by the Lebanese side are slim. [...]

Therein lies the crux. To me there is no question that Iran and Syria will of course "ignore UN strictures by covertly rearming their protege and continue funding its terrorist activities"; that for our Thug-In-Chief, the current resolution is not worth the paper it's written on. There is no question in my mind, that Israel will "be threatened by long range Iranian-built missiles fired from the Bekaa Valley over the heads of a potentially toothless Lebanese-UN stabilization force", and that "the 15,000 UN "Blue Berets" would become nothing more than just a useful screen for Hezbollah to hide behind."

Israel and the US could not, and should not, tolerate the failure of yet another United Nations peacekeeping operation. The decision to respond would be inescapable and would inevitably lead to a wider conflict.

The only possible effective answer to Hezbollah's renewed missile threat would probably be a direct and devastating strike against those countries that supply the militia with weapons, training and finance: Syria and, more important, Iran.

Any failure by the United Nations and the Lebanese government to make the new resolutions stick, any failure to disarm Hezbollah and guarantee Israel's security, may well lead to the wider regional conflict they claim to fear most.

And that is exactly what will happen, a wider war.

Prime Minister Olmert knows it, Secretary Rice knows it, President Bush knows it, but most importantly, Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad not only knows it, but wholeheartedly welcomes it.

And the only variable, determining the time-line, remains unchanged: the war will start when our Thug-In-Chief finally manages to get his dirty mitts on the nuclear bomb. Nothing else, no UNSC resolutions, no diplomatic efforts and certainly no appeasement policies will stop the lethally delusional Ahmadinejad.

So, it continues to be, as it was before July 12th, just a matter of time....

Comments

[Saul Davis]

Alexandra and Slowtrain aptly recognize the problem, and Crusader was correct; I was too optimistic about the likelihood that world opinion would back the Israelis if Hizbullah and Lebanon violated the UN resolution; international anti-semitism and/or the antipathy towards the shedding of Jewish blood is truly virulent and respectable in the international community (!!). When Lebanon and Hizbullah can openly eviscerate the essence of the UN resolution while it is still "warm", and Sec. Rice can write a WAPO op ed that renders the resolution DOA [don't even mention Kofi Anan's nonsensical interpretations of the resolution], truth and ethical behavior have been buried. International diplomacy and the UN are oxymorons.

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Saul

You make an excellent point about ruthlessness (have you read David Warren's latest Op.Ed. piece over at The Western Standard?). I think you are also right about the context in which the decisions were taken to drop the atomic bombs. I doubt very much that people said at the time "Gee, if we drop these, then we will save precisely 983 124 lives, whereas if we don't we lose a further 345 176 on top of the previous...." It was total war, and total war meant pursuing victory ruthlessly. It was only after the fact that the arguments counting projected casualties were seriously made. Truman dropped the bombs to win the war, plain and simple.

Your point about kidnapping Hizb'allah and Hamas families is well-made, and it certainly seems bearing in mind. A benign incarceration is, I suspect, not what the enemy really needs right now. He needs mindless death and destruction on a WWII scale. He wants war. He raises his kids on the glory of all-out war. He preaches it from his minarets, and in his schools. His media are screaming for blood. Perhaps it is 1938 and 1914 all over again.

The longer we dally with the enemy, contenting ourselves with winning the occasional squad-to-squad action, the longer we insulate him from the realities of war, the longer we fail to educate him (and educate him we must, for we are the more knowledgable on the consequences of war, and in particular, total defeat) the more we corrupt him.

We corrupt him by teaching him the wrong things about war. We teach him that continuous warfare is profitable, that there is much to be gained by militarising your entire society. He learns that he need never fear defeat, for we will never allow ourselves to beat him no matter how inept his battlefiled performance, being as we are, "uncomfortable" with victory. And in the end, nothing saves lives like victory.

If the enemy wants war, I say "Give it to him already".

[saul davis]

Crusader: Looking at both my comments, I guess I backtracked and do basically agree with everything you said regarding the manner in which the war should be conducted. I guess my equivocation in the first comment was due to my distaste for true civilian casualties, and the forthright manner in which you suggested the war should be conducted.

[Saul Davis]

Crusader said:
"However, given your discomfort with my (and I guess Harris's and Truman's) approach to warfare, why would you countenance Israel's kidnapping of Hizb'allah family members? Would they not also be "truly innocent"? You realise that by tacitly accepting the Russian tactic (although to a lesser degree) you are essentially supporting my position, that the enemy's civilians MUST be made to suffer the consequences of the wars they support, supply and enable . . . "

You appear to have misunderstood my comment; I am agreeing with a substantial amount of your comments -- that is why I said Israel may not have much of a choice if the terrorists continue firing rockets at Israeli civilians. I completely agree that in time of war civilian casualties are going to happen, and at times in significant numbers; they are a "necessary evil" of war -- Dresden and Hiroshima probably saved millions of allied lives; that is a balance that must be assessed in order to survive; in prior times, I do not believe it was even a consideration in the task of winning a war; my point is that while civilian casualties are to be avoided up to a point, when the enemy is absolutely ruthless and does not give a wit about civilian casualties, when the enemy consistently violates Geneva conventions, then morality at the cost of allied lives is pure nonsense, unless one is willing to live as a slave for one's morality; I am not, especially when the vast majority of the "civilians" completely support the enemy and its practices.

The question that arises is at what point in time, and to what extent does one make the decision to ruthlessly wage war; I am not in a position to make that decision; my personal opinion is that point arrived when they armed their rockets with ball bearings and other anti-personnel material, and used them indiscriminantly against a population/target that was solely civilian. My point in the earlier comment, was that I personally find this tact distasteful, but necessary -- paraphrasing, the only thing Muslim fascists appear to understand is fear and strength. I find it completely distasteful [for lack of a better term at this point] that I, as a person who completely desires peace and harmony believe that it is now time to be ruthless -- I prefer ruthless acts of survival against Muslim Nazis than my subjugation or worse; I am sure that the Israelis, whose reputation for compassion is well earned, must find it equally upsetting that they may have to be ruthless in order to protect themselves, and to survive. That is my point about being concerned with true civilian casualties but " . . . as long as Hizbullah continues to send rockets into civilian areas in Israel, I do not know how Israel has much of a choice but to destroy the rockets and launchers at all costs to the Lebanese."

The suggested kidnappings is nowhere as ruthless as civilian casualties, because the Israelis have a reputation of not torturing or harming captives. Kidnapping is simply effective because it brings the war home to the leadership -- it is now personal.

PS: The part I disagreed with : "Actually I'm kinda surprised Olmert is still alive. I wager he's gonna eat a bullet pretty soon if the ceasefire is widely seen to be such a disaster. I mean they whacked Rabin for far less..."

[Dave]

1559 + 1701 = 3260
1701 - 1559 = 142

Does anyone see the significance of those numbers?
...me either.

[Ernesto Ribeiro]

PALESTINIAN LITTLE CHILDREN KILLERS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETrjbPWxyS8

WATCH NOW in YouTube: (subtitled in English)

This is a Palestinian video, teaching an incitament to mass murder (GENOCIDE), broadcasted in Palestine TV, showing Kindergarten kids in uniform, with guns and speaking their hate doutrination, just ready to preach Nazis slogans.

Totalitarian Nazist State had the Hitlerist Youth. The Hamas & Hezbollah State in the State has the Hitlerist Kindergarten.

The ultimate corruption of human being, since craddle as scum.

Islam terrorism makes Nazist Party looks like a scootter club.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETrjbPWxyS8

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Saul

I am somewhat distressed that the Fascist enemy we fight has pushed us all to the point where some of us are no longer capable of seeing any truly innocent people on the other side, try as we may. I had hoped we would not find ourseleves once again in such a position. I have long since lost my sympathy for the enemy's civilians, but I agree there is quite a difference between not giving a damn how many are killed as a result of our actions, and going after them deliberately.

I submit that on November 11th, many of us in the Free World will pay homage to servicemen who in quite another time, dropped hundreds of tons of bombs on German and Japanese civilians, knowing full well that hundreds of thousands of them would perish. Such indeed was the secondary goal of Bomber Harris. A necessary side-effect of waging total war, with the ultimate goal of unconditional surrender.

However, given your discomfort with my (and I guess Harris's and Truman's) approach to warfare, why would you countenance Israel's kidnapping of Hizb'allah family members? Would they not also be "truly innocent"? You realise that by tacitly accepting the Russian tactic (although to a lesser degree) you are essentially supporting my position, that the enemy's civilians MUST be made to suffer the consequences of the wars they support, supply and enable.

[Saul Davis]

Alexandra: I guess my "wish" was granted; the blogs (Gateway, etc.) indicate that Nasrallah declined to completely accept the resolution at the instigation of the Iranians -- they will remain in the South, will not disarm and the Lebanese army will not be deployed in the south; the Lebanese cabinet has been meeting, but has also been unable to accept the resolution because of Hizbullah's opposition; Iran must really believe that this is the beginning of the coming of the Mahdi. Israel may be afforded another opportunity, which, hopefully, Ohlmert and Perez will not waste this time.

While I have a distinct dislike for the punishment of "innocent civilians," [I am still unsure how many of the so-called civilian casualties in Lebanon were true civilians, versus Hezbullah terrorists in "wolves" clothing"] I do not believe that Israel will have much choice -- I do not completely agree with Crusader's suggestions, because it still pains me to see the truly innocent perish because of these insane fascists; however, as long as Hizbullah continues to send rockets into civilian areas in Israel, I do not know how Israel has much of a choice but to destroy the rockets and launchers at all costs to the Lebanese; the Lebanese are not as equally quilty as Hizbullah, Iran and Syria, but they are far from innocent. I do completely agree with Crusader that the only thing the Muslim mentality appears to understand is fear and strength.

If Israel can somehow forment a 2-prong war -- the IDF versus Hizbullah, and the enemies of Hizbullah within Lebanon versus Hizbullah, that could cause some serious problems to Hizbullah. I would also like to see more serious IDF commando action -- but this time against Nasrallah's personal family and the family of other leaders of Hizbullah; history teaches that this appears to be one of the few things that will cause Hizbullah to retreat from terrorist activity for, at least, a short while. The Russians were quite adept at insuring that Hizbullah would not kidnap their diplomats -- after the first kidnapping, the diplomat was returned unharmed, and Hizbullah stayed away from the Russians. Israel is clearly not at all as ruthless as the Russians [sending finger or other limbs of family members to Hizbullah leaders], but a few kidnappings of family members may go a long way in getting the missing soldiers back -- or have we forgotten the raison d'etre of this conflict?

[slowtrain]

"By handing a victory to Hezbollah, the resolution strengthens the belief of millions of supporters of jihad throughout the world that their side is winning and that they should redouble efforts to achieve their objectives of destroying Israel and running the US out of the Middle East."

First of all, the so-called international community does not care about Israel’s welfare, so why would Israel put her fate in its hands? It is a big mistake to do so; one who is confronted by a life threatening situation, in which he has no one to depend on, had better realize that he has to look within himself to overcome the life threatening situation.

Nevertheless, amidst what appears to be generally perceived as a failure and I must emphasize here that there is a difference between failure to achieve and objective and a defeat, there is always something that could be taken to advantage in every situation where the outcome is less than what was aimed for. Much as it would not do to be a pessimist, war monger or a gloom and doom peddler, but given what drives Hezbollah - the ideological derangement that has predisposed it and its numerous sister groups such as al Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and similar terrorist organizations that now flourish in every nation on earth where there is significant Muslim population or Islamic presence, Hezbollah is not likely to step back from their stated goal to destroy Israel, one could only remain a realistic optimist.

My guess is that this battle may be over but the war is not. As it took 9/11 events to awaken this country to the reality of the dangers that it faced and the seriousness of that danger, so would this be for Israel. If Israel was experiencing war fatigue before this conflict or had underestimated its enemies, the outcome of this war will change that. It will remind Israelis that the danger they face as a nation and as a people had not abetted. Instead, it had been gathering, as it has become evident that Hezbollah drew the first blood in this battle, precisely when it believed it was ready to do so and with a clear objective, however lame that objective may be. No one should be surprised at the euphoric manifestation that has taken hold of the Arab world and Hezbollah supporters, which view the UN brokered ceasefire agreement as a victory for Hezbollah. To the western mind, there is a paradox in this manifestation, but a culture which, as I said before would without hesitation sacrifice 300 Lebanese lives to destroy 3 lives, it is a virtue.

Of course, Hezbollah knew it had no chance in a long war with Israel, but hoped for precisely what it got through this cease fire, provoking a fight in which it cannot win by defeating Israel, but one in which lasting long enough to make Israel look bad and hold back or hold back and look back. Ironically in a gamble where it dubiously plays itself as David against Goliath and hoping that someone will step and convince Israel to hold back. Then it can boast that it is still standing; that means it won the fight. This is nothing short of a madman’s logic, perhaps a fool’s logic, considering that much of Lebanon’s infrastructure is virtually destroyed, hundreds of Lebanese people have lost their lives, Israel has not released any prisoners as Hezbollah demanded and Israel now has control of more Lebanese territory than before the conflict began.

As I said, there is something to learn from this conflict. The outcome of this conflict may actually be more useful to Israel than a quick defeat of Hezbollah, much as the latter is naturally what is desired and is what was expected. But think about this for a moment; now Israel knows it cannot grow complacent, it cannot grow weary; it must take Iran seriously and must triple its effort to protect itself by decisively confronting its enemies. Invariably, this is a lesson that Israel’s allies must also learn. As I said in a previous
Comment:

“Perhaps, the one “good” thing that has already come out of this particular episode in the conflict, assuming good can possibly be associated with the situation and assuming people can be true to themselves, is the knowledge or confirmation of what many of us have repeatedly voiced on this forum - the fact that Iran will not hesitate to arm its proxy armies with nuclear weapons or other WMD should such become available in its arsenal. Does anyone still think that Ahmadenijad and his mullahs were bluffing when he expressed his desire to wipe Israel off the map? The potential of Iran acquiring nuclear capability is a clear and present danger, not only to Israel but to the whole world.” Today President Bush concurred, by stating thus,
"We can only imagine how much more dangerous this conflict would be if Iran had the nuclear weapon it seeks."

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Hear, Hear, liquid.

Amen to that. It's just that I see in Israel a sense of invincibility, built on the results of two wars in which her enemies were as badly-prepared as anyone since Ethelrid the Unready.

Why assume one's opponents are always going to be mush-mellons?

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

I suppose my life could be worse. I could be Ehud Olmert...

If he's a gambling man, he's trying to make 6 spades on 22 combined points, with no certain controls in the side minors, and no 3-level or higher response bid from partner. Makes for a long, hot summer.

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Oh, GD.

Hi Al. How are ya?

So what do you think is going to happen in Israel? 3 Knesset members ejected for heckling and disturbing the peace. So the Knesset ceasefire is clearly over, and the right wing is no royally p***ed (remember the forced removals from Gaza?).

This was the doves' last chance to vindicate that shameful policy, according to the Israeli hard right, and Olmert will be seen by them to have betrayed the country once again. Recall how the hard right reaction to the rounding up of Jews in Gaza went? Expect the right to really come down like a ton of bricks on Israel's lefties now. The Left in Israel is now short on credibility, unless Olmert's peace plan works out stunningly-well. For goodness sake, he just said the Israeli security forces will keep on killing Hizb'allah leaders, as if that's ever achieved anything.

Given that, and I'll say it again, Rabin was whacked for far less, I really hope for Olmert's sake some tangible good comes out of all this. The "settlers" from Gaza must be suffering from exploding head syndrome right now.

Hey, not my idea, just pointing out the way a lot of hardliners in Israel think, and Bibi is next in line for the throne, is he not? I bet a lot of hardliners just had their houses blown out by Katyushas, after having left the Gaza strip under duress, no?

Indeed, jail may be the safest place for Olmert if all this really blows up in his face.

[liquid]

I am not assuming that the world actually operates according to the dictates of deductive or predicate logic expecially since the enemy doesn't play by the rules, it's just I'm not ready to give up on Israel. Like Alexandra reminded us again, about the long term threat, since they haven't been disarmed is about hezbollah becoming the next govt in Lebanon by popular vote--a double squeeze that would be with hamas to the south if allowed. Thank goodness Alexandra keeps us honest here and helps us not to loose sight, I just think alot can happen in a weeks time or two and I gotta hang on to that and hope that plan B and regrouping techniques benefit Israel even though things look bleak now, because Israel can't stand there with a piece of paper and it not be enforced. I am waiting on the enforcement and see how it goes. The fight isn't over and if a new quarterback is tossed in we might see a different game plan in the future. I am just waiting to see how it plays out and keeping faith with support and prayer for the Israel.

[Ghost Dansing]

"Time for Olmert to go to prison, and Bibi to try to fix his mess. Actually I'm kinda surprised Olmert is still alive. I wager he's gonna eat a bullet pretty soon if the ceasefire is widely seen to be such a disaster. I mean they whacked Rabin for far less..."

Wow

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

liquid,

Be careful not to assume that the world actually operates according to the dictates of deductive or predicate logic. Ghost Dansing / Al Gore is a fine example of what even a little bit of schooling can do to the unwary!

The world is not interested in whether or not Israel has an argument, or whether the "International Community" (whatever the heck that is) is justified in demanding things of the Jews. It is all about the politics of deflection and obstruction. And who the world thinks is winning. It is a curious fact that the worse Israel behaves, the more the world will accept their actions. This has been the pattern in Sudan, Rwanda, Iran, China, etc. The world at large is patriarchal, mysoginistic, homophobic, bigoted, and virulently anti-semitic, and hence respects the strong, and despises the weak.

If Israel were to make it known that they henceforth will no longer be distinguishing between Arab or Persian "freedom fighters" and the non-combatants that aid, supply, comfort and replace them, then, and only then, will Israel begin to enjoy a lasting peace.

Running a war according to a PR campaign has been a disaster for Israel. They need to explain that the media can show all the pictures they want to of smashed up little Arab cherubs, it doesn't make a jot of difference. They need to state "well, that's one less Hizb'allah memeber we'll have to kill in the next war".

That unfortunately is the only language the ME seems to understand.

Time for Olmert to go to prison, and Bibi to try to fix his mess. Actually I'm kinda surprised Olmert is still alive. I wager he's gonna eat a bullet pretty soon if the ceasefire is widely seen to be such a disaster. I mean they whacked Rabin for far less...

[rich]

Alexandra,

You are correct. This is only the first chapter of the story of the long war. As such, it certainly could have been worse.

With regard to the Netanyahu answer on Lebanese deaths.

Netanyahu could have answered that most of the Hezbollah were Lebanese, and the Hezbollah were defeated in detail. So naturally more Lebanese died.

If the questioner came back with a more specific question "What about Lebanese civilians?"

Netanyahu could have answered.

"Tell me how many of the Lebanese were civilians. How do you know? In this war where men, women and children are used as suicide bombers. In this war in which no member of Hezbollah wears a uniform. Tell me which of the dead were civilians?

Has there been any reporting on that issue? Or do the captive journalists report all deaths as civilians?"

I would like to see a journalist confronted with those questions. I will not be holding my breath waiting for it to happen!

[Alexandra]

Guys,

On August the 8th I wrote

Finally, how could Siniora have sought to enforce UNSC Resolution 1559, when his government decided only in January to call Hezbollah a "resistance" movement, not a 'militia', with the express intention to bypass the evidently suicidal mission to disarm Hezbollah. 1559 only calls for "for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias", not for 'resistant' movements.

1701 doesn't change this as it only once (paragraph 8) mentions "the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon", which we already know does not apply to Hezbollah, the glorified 'resistant' movement.

But to make matters worse, when reading UNSC Resolution 1701, it becomes crystal clear, that all Hezbollah needs to achieve is either to cow the current Siniora administration into submission or to win the next election. Virtually every clause containing any kind of constraint, equally contains the proviso "unless authorized by the Lebanese Government", making the entire Resolution null and void when a Hezbollah Government authorizes weapons imports, training and all the other goodies from Iran and Syria. Which will lead inexorably to the big war against Iran and Syria, involving the entire region before all of this is sorted out.

[liquid]

Well, it won't matter how many blue caps are brought in, Hezbollah isn't gonna stop! You know, who is to say that Israel signed onto this agreement to regroup and come back and finish them off after Hezbollah violates the ceasefire! Sure there will always be that antisematic force as Crusader explains, but my question is, after Hezbollah starts up again, what legitimate argument would anyone around the world have to stand on then when Israel retaliates?

[Gang of One]

There is no question in my mind, that Israel will "be threatened by long range Iranian-built missiles fired from the Bekaa Valley over the heads of a potentially toothless Lebanese-UN stabilization force", and that "the 15,000 UN "Blue Berets" would become nothing more than just a useful screen for Hezbollah to hide behind."

I again post one of the quatrains by Nostradamus:

Out of the country of Greater Arabia
Shall be born a strong master of Mohammed...
He will enter Europe wearing a blue turban.
He will be the terror of mankind.
Never more horror.

Blue helmet/beret equals blue turban? I have a gut feeling ...

Not completely OT, you have to love Bibi ... even those who aren't particularly sympathetic to Bibi Natanyahu could get a good measure of satisfaction from his interview with the British Television this morning. I guess it can be attributed to his days studying history at Harvard.

The interviewer asked him: "How come so many more Lebanese have been killed in this conflict than Israelis?" (A nasty question if there ever was one!)

Natanyahu: "Are you sure that you want to start asking in that direction?"
Interviewer: (Falling into the trap) Why not?
Natanyahu: "Because in World War II more Germans were killed than British and Americans combined, but there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the war was caused by Germany's aggression. And in response to the German blitz on London, the British wiped out the entire city of Dresden, burning to death more German civilians than the number of people killed in Hiroshima.

Moreover, I could remind you that in 1944, when the R.A.F. tried to bomb the Gestapo Headquarters in Copenhagen, some of the bombs missed their target and fell on a Danish children's hospital, killing 83 little children.
Perhaps you have another question?"

Oh, yeah. Today is the 61st anniversary of VJ Day. The day the Imperial Japanese government surrendered to the Allies. Only ONE state [Rhode Island] still celebrates this day. All others have succumbed to the PC virus that is today robbing the West of its will to fight for survival. Sickening, neh?

[liquid]

Now there has been two fox news folks kidnapped in gaza!!!

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

liquid

Yes. No. Plenty, as the "desparate populist resistance movement let down again by the US/UK cabal". No. No. No.

Anti-semitism is part of a much larger mental illness that is surprisingly resistant to the facts. The world is anti-semitic by default. The latter part of the 20th century was just a hiatus, brought on by feelings of guilt about the Western acquiessence in the Holocaust. So it's back to business as usual, and Israel is the new "International Jew".

Israel has no real friends in the UN. Clearly even the US is prepared to sell out the Israelis so that Bush can complete his experiments in nation-building, and keep the Western economies chugging along on cheap oil (this latter point is no-one's fault, just the economic realities of the day).

At some point Israel will have to decide whether to (1) slaughter her enemies (including women, children, and crying babies) or
(2) evacuate.

There are no other choices. There are no innocent civilians in the Middle East, a fact that could be a great boon to Israel, as she enjoys the capability of killing far more of the enemy's civilians than they can of hers.

Unless and until Israel reaches that point, I think it is time to imagine what it is going to be like evacuating Haifa and Tel Aviv by sea, and under fire. Israel, if you don't think this can happen to you, you've made the mistake your leaders made in the 1940's. Israel, you act in a very cavalier fashion for a people threatened daily with genocide, and having already once been the victims of such.

Will the US and Canada turn the ships away this time?

[liquid]

But on the other hand, what if in the next few days, due to events such as perhaps Israel will be mourning Sharon and if it unfolds that even the procession of Sharon's burial is suddenly disturbed by hezbollah's breaking of the cease fire? Don't we all believe that Hezbollah will violate the cease fire? Wouldn't this finally gain the global support for Israel to retaliate with gusto and change the course of things? If this were to happen--how much sympathy would be directed to the terrorist then? Wouldn't this wake up the sleepy eyes of the skeptics in the world then? Wouldn't such events disarm the media propaganda that fuels the flames that hezbollah enjoys so much today? Couldn't things in the comming days drastically change the global support for Israel without a doubt?

[Jeff Durkin]

There are so many problems with 1701 that I can't believe that anyone on our side thinks it is anything but a) an excuse for the Israelis to slow down its operations - and pull back some or all of its forces - and prep for a large scale invasion of southern Lebanon and b) an attempt by the US to 'earn' some political capital, particularly in Europe by 'cooperating' with the international community. Whether this is a reasonable expectation is another matter.

Certainly, Iran and Syria are not just going to cut their proxy army loose. Further, as I understand it, the Lebanese government has never even seen the armed wing of Hezbollah as anything but a legitimate "resistance movement" and, therefore, not even covered by 1559. And, the military force being sent in - if it ever makes it - is both too small and has such a restricted set of ROEs that it will only serve as cover for the inevitable regrouping and resupply of Hezbollah forces in the south-of-Litani region.

Further, our allowing of the Shebaa farms and other territorial issue (242, etc) to be included on what should have been a narrowly focused resolution providing for the ending of an assault on a member state of the UN (Israel) by a proxy army (Hezbollah) supported by two other member states (Syria and Iran) and hosted by another (Lebanon). While none of us should ignore the larger 'connections' in any conflict in the region (after, all most of the wars, terrorist attacks, semi-failed states, etc can be traced to the refusal of the Arab states to accept Israel and to the abject failure of the nationalist model of Arab development and its replacement by Islamism) to tie in issues that will never be solved (at least in the short-term) with one that in theory could be, ends any hope - however small - that Hezbollah could be defanged, Lebanon stabilized, Syrian and Iran denied their instrument of violence and Israel made more secure.

One has to assume - or, at least one hopes - that Olmert and the IDF general staff decided that, having gotten off on such a wrong foot with their offensive, they can use the UN to reconfigure their forces for what they should have done in the first place: invade southern Lebanon and conduct a massive sweep operation.

As for the prospects of a wider war, I doubt the outcome of Israeli-Hezbollah conflict would make much difference to Iran. In all probability, the tying up of Israeli conventional forces in Lebanon (primarily the air force) is actually a slight encouragement to Iran, given that those same F-15s that could be used to strike targets in Iran and instead being used to attrit Hezbollah. So, ultimately, the war and its outcome are probably just a wash as far as the inevitable end game vis-a-vis Iran.

In my humble opinion, as always.